Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

BruceWayne wrote:If you're not good at math the LSAT is infinitely easier than the math section of the SAT. It's always puzzled me how many people don't get that it's possible to be really good at verbal reasoning etc. but not at math. The two skills really aren't the same at all. I mean there's a reason a lot of the people in law school are in law school and not in med school or getting a degree in finance etc.

THIS. GTFO with the '800 Math SAT is easy to get' bullshit. I found LSAT infinitely easier than the SAT.

800 math is not "easy" to get in the same way a 172+ LSAT is not "easy" to get. but honestly, 800 is kind of the floor for the type of people who go to top engineering programs. saying that a 710 math means you should never ever consider law school is just stupid.

Yeah, the point is that an 800 on math is much easier to get than a 180 on the LSAT. An 800 Math is like 98th percentile, which is like a 172, whereas a 180 is like 99.999% or something crazy.

A 710 is probably more like a 165, which while by no means bad, is not a "wow you should definitely have been an engineer/lawyer!" score. 20,000+ kids each year get an 800. ~200,000+ get a 700+.

I am officially diagnosed with social anxiety disorder. I take meds for it, but that only helps to a certain extent. I also thought I masked it pretty well, but my way of masking it might make me, quite ironically, appear passionless and too laid-back (because anxiety makes me talk slow and appear to have low energy). I've noticed that firm receptions where drinking is allowed have often gone much better than the interviews. But I feel super tired and drained after both interviews and receptions.

I have a Law Review buddy with nearly the same GPA who is socially awkward and says inappropriate but doesn't have the same anxiety issues and can project more energy and intensity. He was striking out, too, but just got 3 callbacks yesterday. Is that really my issue - that the strategy I learned in order to cope with social anxiety actually makes me look not passionate about anything and not having sufficient energy and drive?

Is this type of problem an indication that big law (and law in general) is not a good fit? I have met some super awkward and introverted big law partners--that make me look like Scott Brown-- but I wonder if they got hired either because they had higher grades, Daddy knew somebody, or it was just a better economy.

Given how hard I found it to be in the military (and now in the OCI process), am I just a better fit for a technical field? One thing I've considered is to do an LLM in tax. But that would require taking debt and explaining why I didn't get a 2L SA position. It would also require spending 3 more years in law school. The legal job market is getting worse.

Or could it be that Daddy knowing people and similar experiences like living in the same neighborhoods in Houston or growing up in familiar areas explain a lot of the shared "connections" that lead to callbacks in Texas? I am from rural Texas (like almost none of my classmates) but I left the U.S. pretty young, and most people say I sound like I'm from the coasts. I have normal hobbies like tennis, hiking, swimming, etc. but almost no interviewers mention them, but I've noticed with my classmates at receptions a lot of the firm people and my classmates attended the same high schools.

Or maybe I'm just looking for excuses to fail because I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion (mostly based on my experience at OCI's and receptions) that I would really hate working for a big law firm where you're just a fungible number and have to constantly be putting on a show.

OP, I was entirely in your shoes last year. Went into OCI with law review and literally perfect grades (including a few CALIs), perfect clothing choices (Brooks Brothers/Allen Edmonds), and a total inability to land CBs (0/28).

I was also a science/prelaw person who really, really should have gone into a hard sciences grad program but made a piss-poor life decision to go to law school. I'm guessing that in both our cases, there's something about personality and prior background (which shows up on your resume, presumably) that showcases a poor fit for biglaw. You might want to think about what separates you from your peers, in terms of background, personality, etc., and figure out how to correct for that.

Alternatively, you might end up doing what I did: strike out on biglaw, end up in a much more interesting/intellectually fulfilling bigfed internship, and realize that even in arguably the most exciting legal office in the country, being a lawyer really sucks. Know that missing out on biglaw (if that actually occurs) might not be the end of the world. If you're like me, it might be the best thing that ever happened to you.

I'm not sure if any of that is helpful, but know that you aren't alone.

OP, I was entirely in your shoes last year. Went into OCI with law review and literally perfect grades (including a few CALIs), perfect clothing choices (Brooks Brothers/Allen Edmonds), and a total inability to land CBs (0/28).

I was also a science/prelaw person who really, really should have gone into a hard sciences grad program but made a piss-poor life decision to go to law school. I'm guessing that in both our cases, there's something about personality and prior background (which shows up on your resume, presumably) that showcases a poor fit for biglaw. You might want to think about what separates you from your peers, in terms of background, personality, etc., and figure out how to correct for that.Alternatively, you might end up doing what I did: strike out on biglaw, end up in a much more interesting/intellectually fulfilling bigfed internship, and realize that even in arguably the most exciting legal office in the country, being a lawyer really sucks. Know that missing out on biglaw (if that actually occurs) might not be the end of the world. If you're like me, it might be the best thing that ever happened to you.

I can't do big fed (its not worth going into). So I really came to law school for big law. I don't think small firms would be a good fit. So...if I don't like this process, is it safe to say I won't like law?

What separates my background / personality from that of my classmates? Everything. I had kind of an unusual background and one that does not indicate either geographic stability or focus. of course, personalities come in all types and all types--including many much more socially awkward and less polished types-- except me seem to be getting callbacks.

How likely is it that my 1 Dechert, NY callback (from UT) will lead to an offer? My interviewer was a very very senior partner, if that makes his opinion either more (or possibly less) weighty.

BruceWayne wrote:Not trying to be a jackass OP, but someone with those kinds of standardized math test scores shouldn't be going into law ITE unless they have a true passion for law (which you clearly don't). THAT may be the culprit in your interviews. From what you described, especially considering the market for energy right now, I would HEAVILY consider going the petroleum engineering route that you described.

um, 710 SAT math is not that good. Honestly, an 800 is pretty easy. This isn't the LSAT. Petroleum engineering, whatever the fuck that means, is probably significantly harder.

Not that you're wrong, otherwise. Fuck law if you have no interest in it. There's way better career paths.

If you're not good at math the LSAT is infinitely easier than the math section of the SAT. It's always puzzled me how many people don't get that it's possible to be really good at verbal reasoning etc. but not at math. The two skills really aren't the same at all. I mean there's a reason a lot of the people in law school are in law school and not in med school or getting a degree in finance etc.

no.

your opinions are dumb. 710 math is like barely 90th percentile. anyone who scored a 170+ on the LSAT could break 750 math with minimal study.

You're an incredibly ignorant person. You have a bad habit of speaking without thinking. I've broken 170 on the LSAT and I've never come close to that SAT math score. And honestly I've known several people like that as well. Honestly, I hope you were joking with that comment--because seriously it was probably the dumbest thing I've read on the internet. That's really saying something. Why didn't you just qualify your comment by saying that a person who couldn't get a 710 math SAT couldn't score well on the logic games? That way you wouldn't have looked like a total fool.

Anyway like someone said this wasn't the point of the thread. I was just trying to understand the poster who mentioned their SAT scores a bit better.

I think you may be suffering from a painful lack of self-awareness. It may help if you tape yourself in a mock interview. Try to watch your body language/actions and listen to your responses objectively.

WarioLaw wrote:I think you may be suffering from a painful lack of self-awareness. It may help if you tape yourself in a mock interview. Try to watch your body language/actions and listen to your responses objectively.

I just got an S&C callback (I'm at UT). That makes 2.

1. I have done this.

2. I have done mocks with practitioners, CSO counselors, and even friends. Yeah, my interviewing is not perfect. No one thinks it is. But it's not that bad either. Yes, I'm nervous. But so are other people, and my anxiety is not debilitating and is only sometimes even apparent to observers (based on external feedback and not since I went on Xanax).

I'm wondering if the preselect format creates a different dynamic than the usual lottery system that disadvantages all but the most extroverted students. At a school like NYU, they look to see if 1) you have an acceptable GPA and 2) are you a weirdo? At UT, almost everyone in the interview room is acceptable. Differentiation is almost exclusively based on the interview. UT also has fewer nerds and more well-adjusted normal people than I remember seeing when I visited Penn and Chicago. The interview competition may just be tougher. This would also explain why my 2 callbacks are from NYC.

I also talk a bit funny--with certain syllables dragged out and I talk super slow (I used to get made fun of in college as talking like a robot), but it isn't nearly as bad as it was even a few years ago- due to being born deaf and not getting surgery to recover my hearing until age 5. Could my abysmal callback performance be due to something as petty as this? If this really is possible, I really don't want to be in this profession at all, and I don't care that I've clearly outed myself.

OP - why didn't you start by mentioning your social anxiety disorder? I am willing to bet that experienced interviewers are picking up indications of something not being "quite right" personality wise in your interviews. You are either nervous or so laid back that you seem emotionless or robot like. That must put interviewers off just enough that they aren't giving you a callback.

On the other hand you have two callbacks which means you have a solid chance to get a job. I would focus on doing well at those callbacks and getting an offer. You have done well to get these callbacks. Just do your best to get the job and forget about all the callbacks you didn't get. That's water under the bridge now, so let it go.

Lawyers have to deal with people constantly. But a lot of them are socially awkward. So I think if you can manage this disorder you have a chance. I don't know anything about this disorder so I won't begin to pretend to be able to tell you how working in a firm will go for you.

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

NYC2014 wrote:Read original post and first page. Two bits of advice for you, OP:

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

NYC2014 wrote:Read original post and first page. Two bits of advice for you, OP:

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

BruceWayne wrote:Not trying to be a jackass OP, but someone with those kinds of standardized math test scores shouldn't be going into law ITE unless they have a true passion for law (which you clearly don't). THAT may be the culprit in your interviews. From what you described, especially considering the market for energy right now, I would HEAVILY consider going the petroleum engineering route that you described.

um, 710 SAT math is not that good. Honestly, an 800 is pretty easy. This isn't the LSAT. Petroleum engineering, whatever the fuck that means, is probably significantly harder.

Not that you're wrong, otherwise. Fuck law if you have no interest in it. There's way better career paths.

Hahaha - but yeah this post is accurate. 710 math sat is not impressive for engineering. Its pretty easy to get near perfect on the math portions of standardized tests - its black and white like logic games. Not grey area like lror rc

NYC2014 wrote:Read original post and first page. Two bits of advice for you, OP:

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

2) Blame Obama.

Actually am white and male--as well as straight, but most people think otherwise, including many girls unfortunately, so I could certainly play that up if it's any kind of boost at all (unlikely since most gay people are smart and educated, so they don't need any kind of AA boost).

It seems easier to turn EE than it is to turn trans, just saying.

As for the off-topic conversation, while 710 math isn't superb, it is around average for many well-respected engineering programs, including Texas A&M and Georgia Tech. An average performer in an EE or PE program can still get a job, like apparently this top fifth or top sixth law school performer can't.

NYC2014 wrote:Read original post and first page. Two bits of advice for you, OP:

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

NYC2014 wrote:Read original post and first page. Two bits of advice for you, OP:

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

2) Blame Obama.

Actually am white and male--as well as straight, but most people think otherwise, including many girls unfortunately, so I could certainly play that up if it's any kind of boost at all (unlikely since most gay people are smart and educated, so they don't need any kind of AA boost).

It seems easier to turn EE than it is to turn trans, just saying.

As for the off-topic conversation, while 710 math isn't superb, it is around average for many well-respected engineering programs, including Texas A&M and Georgia Tech. An average performer in an EE or PE program can still get a job, like apparently this top fifth or top sixth law school performer can't.

You're probly right, in fact some of the engineers that I work with may well have scored lower than that on the sat. Anyone can be an engineer

NYC2014 wrote:Read original post and first page. Two bits of advice for you, OP:

1) Be less of a straight white male. I know you didn't write that you were but I'm sure you are - otherwise you'd have about a 1:1 screener interview/offer ratio. Firms sure do love that there diversity. You can drop out and work on this over the next year -probably easiest to turn gay, but you could become a woman if you prefer.

OP, honestly bro, you sound depressed. Your first post was written when you were hammered, the whole thing sounds a little despondent, and you keep repeating how you just don't have any passion or enthusiasm for anything because you're just not that kind of guy.

I'm a lawyer with no medical training whatsoever judging you based on a small sample of anonymous posts, so take my opinion with a Buick sized grain of salt here, but keep in mind that the people interviewing you are also lawyers with no medical training judging you based on a really small sample size, so it's not insane they might come to the same conclusion. If I have the choice between a brilliant but depressed and lethargic guy or a smart and super enthusiastic and hard-working guy, I'm going to take the latter 10 times out of 10.

If you think I'm wildly off-base, then go ahead and ignore this post. But if I might be onto something here, why not make an appointment with your doctor?